Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 6 minor 46 references

Dust charging in dynamic ion wakes

T0 review · 2 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read A molecular-dynamics simulation of dust and ions shows that a grain passing through another grain's ion wake loses charge almost linearly with their vertical separation, and maps the wake's attractive force.

desk verdict A useful self-consistent MD tool for dusty-plasma wakes, with novel decharging maps; the headline hysteresis is probably partly a smoothing artifact and needs a controlled test before it is sold as physics. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.04224 v1 pith:Z3VHQAGP submitted 2019-08-12 physics.plasm-ph physics.comp-ph

Lorin Swint Matthews , Dustin L. Sanford , Evdokiya Kostadinova , Khandaker Sharmin Ashrafi , Evelyn Guay , Truell W. Hyde This is my paper · ORCID
classification physics.plasm-phphysics.comp-ph PACS 52.27.Lw52.65.-y
keywords dustyplasmaionwakefielddustchargingmoleculardynamicsDRIADsheathpoint-chargemodelnon-reciprocalforces
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper introduces DRIAD, a molecular-dynamics simulation that advances ions and dust on separate time steps and computes dust charge directly from simulated ion and electron currents, so grain charging, grain motion, and the ion wake are coupled rather than assumed fixed. Using two vertically aligned grains in a sheath-like argon plasma, it finds that the lower grain is decharged as it moves through the upper grain's ion wake, with the charge reduction almost linearly proportional to vertical separation. It maps this decharging and the ion-wake attractive force for drift speeds $v_{dr}=0.4$, $0.6$, and $1.0\,M$, and shows the wake's positive-charge region changes shape and position as the grains approach. If these results hold, experiments that reconstruct electric fields from dust trajectories while assuming constant grain charge must be revisited, and simplified wake models should carry dynamic-charge information rather than a fixed point-charge focus.

What carries the argument

The central mechanism is DRIAD, a molecular-dynamics code with an asymmetric force treatment: ion-ion forces use a Yukawa potential with electron Debye shielding, while ion-dust forces are bare Coulomb. Ions are represented by superions and advanced on a short ion time step $\Delta t_i = \tau_i/100$; after the ion distribution equilibrates, the dust is advanced on a much longer dust time step $\Delta t_d = 10^{-4}$ s using forces averaged over the intervening ion steps. Dust charge is updated from an orbital-motion-limited electron current plus the collected ion current, then smoothed by the weighted average $Q_d(t_d)=0.95 Q_d(t_d-1)+0.05 Q_{\rm avg}(t_d)$. The wake itself is quantified by integrating the excess ion density $n_i>1.6 n_0$ to obtain a wake charge $q_w$, whose position and shape are compared with spherical and ellipsoidal point-charge potentials.

What would settle it

Recompute the charge-versus-separation curves with Eq. (11) replaced by an unlagged average over the same ion-time-step data, or else freeze the dust grain at each separation until the ion flow equilibrates; if the hysteresis loop in Fig. 8 collapses, the loop is smoothing lag rather than wake physics.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that dust charging cannot be decoupled from wake-mediated dynamics: in DRIAD, a downstream dust grain is decharged while inside the upstream grain's ion wake, and the fractional charge drop is almost linear in the vertical separation between the two grains. The charge-versus-separation curves show hysteresis, with different charge values on approach and recession, which the paper attributes to the grain moving through the high-ion-density wake region. The paper also reports that the ion wake's positive space charge shifts and merges as the grains approach, that a spherical point-charge model of the wake is adequate only near or above the ion sound speed while subsonic flow needs an ellipsoidal charge region, and that the resulting ion force is non-reciprocal: it attracts the downstream grain horizontally and pushes the pair together vertically. The intended payoff is a self-consistent method for mapping wakefields and grain charge from simulated trajectories, applicable to experimental conditions where charge and field cannot be measured independently.

Load-bearing premise

The reported wake decharging and its hysteresis rest on the smoothed charge update $Q_d(t_d)=0.95 Q_d(t_d-1)+0.05 Q_{\rm avg}(t_d)$ faithfully representing the true grain charge; if the filter's built-in lag creates the observed loop, the decharging maps and force maps inherit a numerical artifact.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Charge cannot be treated as a constant parameter in wake-mediated dust interactions; electric-field maps reconstructed from particle motion under a constant-charge assumption inherit systematic error.
  • At ion drift speeds near $1.0\,M$ a spherical effective point charge captures the wake, while at subsonic speeds the wake is better represented by an ellipsoidal positive-charge region whose size and location the simulation provides.
  • Below a vertical separation of roughly $0.4\lambda_{De}$ the ion focusing regions of two grains merge into a single wake, with excess positive charge concentrated downstream of the lower grain.
  • The ion wake exerts a horizontal attractive force on the downstream grain and a vertical force asymmetry that pushes the two grains together, with both effects weakening as ion drift speed increases.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Beyond the paper: if the hysteresis survives an unlagged or symmetrized charge filter, the grain charge is a memory-dependent functional of the wake flow, and dust-lattice mode calculations should include a charge-history term.
  • Beyond the paper: the same self-consistent charge mapping could be applied to polarity-switching experiments, predicting that the homogeneous-to-string structural transition shifts once charges are allowed to vary on both upstream and downstream sides.
  • Beyond the paper: a laboratory test could oscillate the lower grain vertically at controlled amplitude and measure the effective restoring force versus separation; a local softening where the simulation predicts maximum decharging would support the charge-drop mechanism without resolving the charge directly.
  • Beyond the paper: halving $\Delta t_d$ while preserving the physical parameters should change the hysteresis loop if the 0.95/0.05 moving average is responsible; a loop that remains unchanged would confirm a physical wake-memory origin.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

2 major / 6 minor

Summary. The manuscript introduces DRIAD, a molecular-dynamics simulation that advances ions and dust on separate time steps and computes dust charge from OML electron current and collected ion flux rather than imposing a fixed charge. It applies the model to a two-particle vertical pair in a GEC cell, with the lower particle laser-perturbed, at ion drift speeds of 0.4, 0.6, and 1.0 Mach. The paper presents ion density and potential maps, maps of the downstream particle's decharging as a function of separation, wake charge and location statistics, a comparison of simulated on-axis potentials with Coulomb, spherical, and ellipsoidal point-charge representations, and maps of ion-mediated forces. The headline claims are that the downstream grain is decharged inside the upstream wake, that the decharging depends almost linearly on vertical separation, and that the charge-versus-separation curve shows hysteresis.

Significance. The DRIAD approach addresses a genuine need: wakefield-mediated interaction is usually modeled with static or prescribed dust charge, whereas here charging is coupled to the ion dynamics and dust motion. If the charging dynamics are correctly rendered, the decharging and force maps are a useful benchmark for wakefield models and for interpreting experiments. The point-charge comparison is a sensible application of the simulated wake statistics. The paper does not provide machine-checked proofs or code, but it presents a forward simulation with explicit physical inputs. The main weakness is that the exponential smoothing of the dust charge in Eq. (11) is not tested as an origin of the reported hysteresis and can bias the charge and force maps that anchor the paper's claims; this must be resolved before the quantitative conclusions are accepted.

major comments (2)
  1. [Section III.B, Eq. (11)] The dynamic charge Q_d(t_d)=0.95 Q_d(t_d-1)+0.05 Q_avg(t_d) is a first-order low-pass filter with a time constant of roughly 20 dust steps. Such a filter creates a phase-shifted, elliptical loop when Q_d is plotted against a periodic input such as Delta z, even if the underlying instantaneous Q_avg(Delta z) is single-valued. The paper excludes only the relative ion-drift velocity as a cause of the hysteresis and does not consider the filter. The vertical oscillation period of P2 and the dust radius and mass used in the argon runs are not reported, so the reader cannot compare the filter time constant with the P2 dynamics. This issue is load-bearing because Q_d from Eq. (11) enters the force equation (Eq. 5), the decharging maps (Figs. 8-10), the force maps (Figs. 16-17), and the normalization of the point-charge comparison (Fig. 15). I request a control calculation with the smoothing disabled or the filter inverted, or a quantitative demonstration that the observed loop width and phase exceed the filter-induced values.
  2. [Sections II.A and II.C] The superion representation is under-specified. It is stated that superions have the same charge-to-mass ratio as a single ion and that roughly 100 ions per superion are used, but the exact number, and the relation between q_i in Eqs. (2)-(4), the physical ion charge, and the superion charge, are not given. In the charging model, Delta Q_di = N_ic q_i, and it is unclear whether q_i is the superion charge or the single-ion charge and how N_ic is counted from the simulation and reinjection procedure. Equation (8) uses the dust surface potential Phi_d without explicitly stating Phi_d = Q_d/(4 pi epsilon_0 a). These omissions prevent reproduction of the model and affect the absolute charge values, the wake-charge estimates in Eq. (13), and the point-charge parameters used in Section III.D. Please provide explicit definitions of the superion charge and mass and the conversion between simulated ion fluxes and physical charging currents.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Eq. (16)] The interior branch of the spherical point-charge potential uses Q_{w,j} while the exterior branch uses q_{w,j}; please use a single symbol and define it consistently.
  2. [Section II and Fig. 2] The statement that Delta t_i = tau_i/100 appears inconsistent with the Fig. 2 caption value Delta t_i = 10^{-9} s for tau_i = 1.5 microseconds; please reconcile these numbers.
  3. [Section III.B] Define Q_0 in the text rather than only in the caption of Fig. 8, and state the actual P2 velocity range and oscillation period used to support the claim that relative ion drift is negligible.
  4. [Section III.C] The wake charge q_w and the radial and axial extents depend on the ad hoc threshold n_i > 1.6 n_0; please add a sensitivity analysis or a physical justification for this threshold.
  5. [Section III.D, Fig. 15] Describe exactly how the background potential slope is computed and subtracted and how the V_0 normalization is applied, so the comparison in Fig. 15 can be reproduced.
  6. [Fig. 10 caption] The phrase 'normal fit to the data' is ambiguous; please specify whether this is a linear least-squares fit, a Gaussian fit, or something else.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 6.0 of 10

The apparent charge hysteresis is partly created by the exponential moving average in Eq. 11; the central decharging maps remain a forward simulation result.

  1. fitted input called prediction [Section II.C, Eq. (11); Section III.B, Fig. 8]
    "To smooth out these large fluctuations on the dust time step, which is nearly 100 times longer than 100τ_i, the dynamic dust charge is calculated from a weighted average of the dust charge at the previous dust time step and the average charge at the current dust time step Q_d(t_d) = 0.95 Q_d(t_d − 1) + 0.05 Q_avg(t_d). ... Although the dynamic dust charge lags behind the charge calculated on the ion time step ... Interestingly, there appears to be a hysteresis in the charge, depending on whether the downstream particle is approaching or receding from the upstream particle."

    Equation (11) is a first-order IIR low-pass filter with coefficient 0.05, giving a time constant of about 20 dust steps. Any periodic variation in Q_avg(t_d) is therefore phase-shifted in Q_d(t_d). Since the lower particle oscillates in the wake, Q_avg varies periodically with vertical displacement, so plotting the filtered Q_d against Δz automatically produces a hysteretic loop even if the underlying equilibrium charge were a single-valued function of Δz. The paper explicitly acknowledges the lag but, when interpreting Fig. 8, rules out only the relative ion-drift-velocity mechanism and attributes the loop to the grain approaching or receding from the high-density wake region. The filter-induced lag is never separated from the wake physics.

full rationale

The core DRIAD simulation is a self-contained forward model: ion motion, dust dynamics, and charging are integrated from stated cross-sections, boundary conditions, and OML currents; the decharging maps and wake-force maps are outputs of that integration, not re-statements of inputs. The point-charge/ellipsoid comparison in Section III.D is an explicit fitting exercise (q_w, r_w, and location are taken from the simulation) and is labeled as comparison, not prediction. Self-citations such as [36] and [37] are used only to justify boundary and field profiles and do not carry the central derivation. The one place where a reported result is partly constructed from the model definition is the apparent hysteresis in Section III.B: the low-pass filter in Eq. 11 has an acknowledged lag, and the paper does not remove this filter artifact before attributing the loop to wakefield geometry. This is a partial circularity in a secondary claim; the main decharging and force maps retain independent simulation content.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central simulation rests on several modeling assumptions drawn from prior work: Boltzmann electrons, Yukawa ion-ion shielding, Coulomb ion-dust and dust-dust interactions, OML electron current, and a specific ion-neutral collision model. The only hand-tuned numerical parameter that directly affects the reported charge dynamics is the smoothing coefficient in Eq. 11. The wake threshold 1.6 n_0 is a diagnostic choice for defining wake extents. No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (2)
  • Charge smoothing coefficient alpha = 0.05 (with 0.95 on previous value)
    In Eq. 11, the dynamic dust charge is an exponential moving average. The coefficient 0.05 is chosen to smooth charge fluctuations so that the standard deviation (sigma=76 e) matches the theoretical OML variance (sigma=69 e, Eq. 10). This choice affects the charge dynamics and may contribute to the observed hysteresis.
  • Wake density threshold = n_i > 1.6 n_0
    The wake boundary is defined as the region where ion density exceeds 1.6 times the bulk density (contours in Fig. 5). This threshold is chosen by hand and determines the computed wake charge q_w and extents r_w and Delta_z_w used in the point-charge comparison.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Electrons are Boltzmann distributed
    Used for the electron Debye shielding in the Yukawa ion-ion potential (Eq. 3), for the electron OML current (Eq. 8), and for the background potential. Electrons are not tracked kinetically.
  • domain assumption Ion-dust and dust-dust interactions are unscreened Coulomb
    Eq. 4 uses a Coulomb potential between ions and dust, justified by electron depletion near the dust; dust-dust forces are also Coulomb. This follows Piel's method.
  • domain assumption OML theory applies for the electron current
    Eq. 8 computes the electron current from OML theory with ambient density n_e, assuming collisionless electrons. The paper cites OML for low-density plasmas and notes higher-pressure corrections are needed for ions, but electrons are still treated by OML.
  • domain assumption Ion-neutral collisions are described by the null-collision method with Ar-Ar+ cross sections from the Phelps database and Ne-Ne+ from Jovanovic et al.
    Used in Eq. 2 for ion dynamics; the collision model determines the drag and the drift velocity.
  • domain assumption The cylindrical simulation region with reinjection at the boundary approximates an infinite homogeneous plasma
    Ions leaving are reinjected as a shifted Maxwellian; the confinement force is computed by subtracting the potential of the finite cylinder from a uniform background potential.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Dust charging in dynamic ion wakes." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/Z3VHQAGP

@misc{pith2026190804224,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Dust charging in dynamic ion wakes},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/Z3VHQAGP}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.04224}
}
read the original abstract

Micron-sized dust grains have been successfully employed as non-perturbative probes to measure variations in plasma conditions on small spatial scales, such as those found in plasma sheaths. The dynamics of the grains can be used to map the forces due to electric fields present in the sheath, but the particle charge and electric field are difficult to measure independently. The problem is further complicated by the ion wake field which develops downstream of the dust grains in a flowing plasma. Within a sheath, ions are accelerated towards the charged boundary, and this ion flow creates a positively-charged spatial region downstream of the dust grain, called the ion wake. The ion wake in turn modifies the interaction potential between the charged grains. Here we use a molecular dynamics simulation of ion flow past dust grains to investigate the interaction between the charged dust particles and ions. The charging and dynamics of the grains are coupled self-consistently and derived from the ion-dust interactions, allowing for detailed analysis of the wakefield-mediated interaction as the structural configuration of the dust grains changes. The decharging of a dust grain as it moves through the wake of an upstream particle and the attractive ion wakefield force are mapped for a range of ion flow speeds.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

46 extracted references · 46 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Crystallization Dynamics of a Single Layer Complex Plasma,

    P. Hartmann et al., “Crystallization Dynamics of a Single Layer Complex Plasma,” Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 105, p. 115004, 2010

    work page 2010

  2. [2]

    Direct observation of Coulomb crystals and liquids in strongly coupled rf dusty plasmas,

    J. H. Chu and L. I, “Direct observation of Coulomb crystals and liquids in strongly coupled rf dusty plasmas,” Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 72, no. 25, pp. 4009–4012, Jun. 1994

    work page 1994

  3. [3]

    Formation of liquidlike and crystalline structures in dusty plasmas,

    A. P. Nefedov, O. F. Petrov, V. I. Molotkov, and V. E. Fortov, “Formation of liquidlike and crystalline structures in dusty plasmas,” J. Exp. Theor. Phys. Lett., vol. 72, no. 4, pp. 218–226, Aug. 2000

    work page 2000

  4. [4]

    One- dimensional vertical dust strings in a glass box,

    J. Kong, T. W. Hyde, L. Matthews, K. Qiao, Z. Zhang, and A. Douglass, “One- dimensional vertical dust strings in a glass box,” Phys. Rev. E, vol. 84, no. 1, p. 016411, Jul. 2011

    work page 2011

  5. [5]

    Plasma Crystal: Coulomb Crystallization in a Dusty Plasma,

    H. Thomas, G. E. Morfill, V. Demmel, J. Goree, B. Feuerbacher, and D. Möhlmann, “Plasma Crystal: Coulomb Crystallization in a Dusty Plasma,” Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 73, no. 5, pp. 652–655, Aug. 1994

    work page 1994

  6. [7]

    Measurement of the Wakefield Attraction for ‘Dust Plasma Molecules,’

    A. Melzer, V. A. Schweigert, and A. Piel, “Measurement of the Wakefield Attraction for ‘Dust Plasma Molecules,’” Phys. Scr., vol. 61, no. 4, pp. 494–501, Apr. 2000

    work page 2000

  7. [8]

    On the influence of wakefields on three-dimensional particle arrangements,

    M. Kroll, J. Schablinski, D. Block, and A. Piel, “On the influence of wakefields on three-dimensional particle arrangements,” Phys. Plasmas, vol. 17, no. 1, p. 013702, Jan. 2010

    work page 2010

  8. [9]

    Nonequilibrium finite dust clusters: Connecting normal modes and wakefields,

    A. Melzer, A. Schella, and M. Mulsow, “Nonequilibrium finite dust clusters: Connecting normal modes and wakefields,” Phys. Rev. E, vol. 89, no. 1, p. 013109, Jan. 2014

    work page 2014

Show all 46 references
  1. [11]

    Mode Couplings and Conversions for Horizontal Dust Particle Pairs in Complex Plasmas,

    K. Qiao, J. Kong, Z. Zhang, L. S. Matthews, and T. W. Hyde, “Mode Couplings and Conversions for Horizontal Dust Particle Pairs in Complex Plasmas,” IEEE Trans. Plasma Sci., vol. 41, no. 4, pp. 745–753, Apr. 2013

    2013

  2. [12]

    Heating and phase transitions of dust-plasma crystals in a flowing plasma,

    F. Melandsø, “Heating and phase transitions of dust-plasma crystals in a flowing plasma,” Phys. Rev. E, vol. 55, no. 6, pp. 7495–7506, Jun. 1997

    1997

  3. [13]

    Polarized supersonic plasma flow simulation for charged bodies such as dust particles and spacecraft,

    F. Melandsø and J. Goree, “Polarized supersonic plasma flow simulation for charged bodies such as dust particles and spacecraft,” Phys. Rev. E, vol. 52, no. 5, pp. 5312– 5326, Nov. 1995

    1995

  4. [14]

    Alignment and instability of dust crystals in plasmas,

    V. A. Schweigert, I. V. Schweigert, A. Melzer, A. Homann, and A. Piel, “Alignment and instability of dust crystals in plasmas,” Phys. Rev. E, vol. 54, no. 4, pp. 4155–4166, Oct. 1996

    1996

  5. [16]

    Computation of charge and ion drag force on multiple static spherical dust grains immersed in rf discharges,

    V. R. Ikkurthi, K. Matyash, A. Melzer, and R. Schneider, “Computation of charge and ion drag force on multiple static spherical dust grains immersed in rf discharges,” Phys. Plasmas, vol. 17, no. 10, p. 103712, Oct. 2010

    2010

  6. [18]

    Collisional effects on nonlinear ion drag force for small grains,

    I. H. Hutchinson and C. B. Haakonsen, “Collisional effects on nonlinear ion drag force for small grains,” Phys. Plasmas, vol. 20, no. 8, p. 083701, Aug. 2013

    2013

  7. [19]

    Forces on a Small Grain in the Nonlinear Plasma Wake of Another,

    I. H. Hutchinson, “Forces on a Small Grain in the Nonlinear Plasma Wake of Another,” Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 107, no. 9, p. 095001, Aug. 2011

    2011

  8. [20]

    Charging and dynamics of a dust grain in the wake of another grain in flowing plasmas,

    W. J. Miloch, M. Kroll, and D. Block, “Charging and dynamics of a dust grain in the wake of another grain in flowing plasmas,” Phys. Plasmas, vol. 17, no. 10, p. 103703, Oct. 2010

    2010

  9. [21]

    Dust grain charging in a wake of other grains,

    W. J. Miloch and D. Block, “Dust grain charging in a wake of other grains,” Phys. Plasmas, vol. 19, no. 12, p. 123703, Dec. 2012

    2012

  10. [22]

    Simulations of Several Finite-sized Objects in Plasma,

    W. J. Miloch, “Simulations of Several Finite-sized Objects in Plasma,” Procedia Comput. Sci., vol. 51, pp. 1282–1291, Jan. 2015

    2015

  11. [23]

    Dynamic ion shadows behind finite-sized objects in collisionless magnetized plasma flows,

    W. J. Miloch, H. Jung, D. Darian, F. Greiner, M. Mortensen, and A. Piel, “Dynamic ion shadows behind finite-sized objects in collisionless magnetized plasma flows,” New J. Phys., vol. 20, no. 7, p. 073027, Jul. 2018

    2018

  12. [24]

    Molecular dynamics simulation of ion flows around microparticles,

    A. Piel, “Molecular dynamics simulation of ion flows around microparticles,” Phys. Plasmas, vol. 24, no. 3, p. 033712, Mar. 2017

    2017

  13. [25]

    Molecular dynamics simulations of wake structures behind a microparticle in a magnetized ion flow. I. Collisionless limit with cold ion beam,

    A. Piel, F. Greiner, H. Jung, and W. J. Miloch, “Molecular dynamics simulations of wake structures behind a microparticle in a magnetized ion flow. I. Collisionless limit with cold ion beam,” Phys. Plasmas, vol. 25, no. 8, p. 083702, Aug. 2018

    2018

  14. [26]

    Molecular dynamics simulations of wake structures behind a microparticle in a magnetized ion flow. II. Effects of velocity spread and ion collisions,

    A. Piel, H. Jung, and F. Greiner, “Molecular dynamics simulations of wake structures behind a microparticle in a magnetized ion flow. II. Effects of velocity spread and ion collisions,” Phys. Plasmas, vol. 25, no. 8, p. 083703, Aug. 2018

    2018

  15. [27]

    Intergrain forces in low-Mach-number plasma wakes,

    I. H. Hutchinson, “Intergrain forces in low-Mach-number plasma wakes,” Phys. Rev. E, vol. 85, no. 6, p. 066409, Jun. 2012

    2012

  16. [28]

    Ion collection by a sphere in a flowing plasma: I. Quasineutral,

    I. H. Hutchinson, “Ion collection by a sphere in a flowing plasma: I. Quasineutral,” Plasma Phys. Control. Fusion, vol. 44, no. 9, p. 1953, 2002

    1953

  17. [29]

    Collisional and collisionless expansion of Yukawa balls,

    A. Piel and J. A. Goree, “Collisional and collisionless expansion of Yukawa balls,” Phys. Rev. E, vol. 88, no. 6, p. 063103, Dec. 2013

    2013

  18. [30]

    Experimental Determination of Dust-Particle Charge in a Discharge Plasma at Elevated Pressures,

    S. Ratynskaia et al., “Experimental Determination of Dust-Particle Charge in a Discharge Plasma at Elevated Pressures,” Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 93, no. 8, Aug. 2004

    2004

  19. [31]

    Particle charge in the bulk of gas discharges,

    S. A. Khrapak et al., “Particle charge in the bulk of gas discharges,” Phys. Rev. E, vol. 72, no. 1, p. 016406, Jul. 2005

    2005

  20. [32]

    Analytical model of particle charging in plasmas over a wide range of collisionality,

    M. Gatti and U. Kortshagen, “Analytical model of particle charging in plasmas over a wide range of collisionality,” Phys. Rev. E, vol. 78, no. 4, Oct. 2008

    2008

  21. [33]

    Particle simulation methods for studies of low-pressure plasma sources,

    Z. Donkó, “Particle simulation methods for studies of low-pressure plasma sources,” Plasma Sources Sci. Technol., vol. 20, no. 2, p. 024001, 2011

    2011

  22. [34]

    The application of scattering cross sections to ion flux models in discharge sheaths,

    A. V. Phelps, “The application of scattering cross sections to ion flux models in discharge sheaths,” J. Appl. Phys., vol. 76, no. 2, pp. 747–753, Jul. 1994

    1994

  23. [35]

    Momentum transfer theory of ion transport under the influence of resonant charge transfer collisions: the case of argon and neon ions in parent gases,

    J. V. Jovanović, S. B. Vrhovac, and Z. Lj. Petrović, “Momentum transfer theory of ion transport under the influence of resonant charge transfer collisions: the case of argon and neon ions in parent gases,” Eur. Phys. J. - At. Mol. Opt. Plasma Phys., vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 335–342...

    2002

  24. [36]

    Determination of the levitation limits of dust particles within the sheath in complex plasma experiments,

    A. Douglass, V. Land, K. Qiao, L. Matthews, and T. Hyde, “Determination of the levitation limits of dust particles within the sheath in complex plasma experiments,” Phys. Plasmas, vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 013707-013707–8, Jan. 2012

    2012

  25. [37]

    Dust as probe for horizontal field distribution in low pressure gas discharges,

    P. Hartmann, A. Z. Kovács, J. C. Reyes, L. S. Matthews, and T. W. Hyde, “Dust as probe for horizontal field distribution in low pressure gas discharges,” Plasma Sources Sci. Technol., vol. 23, no. 4, p. 045008, Aug. 2014

    2014

  26. [38]

    Probe theory - the orbital motion approach,

    J. E. Allen, “Probe theory - the orbital motion approach,” Phys. Scr., vol. 45, no. 5, p. 497, May 1992

    1992

  27. [39]

    Fokker-Planck description of particle charging in ionized gases,

    T. Matsoukas and M. Russell, “Fokker-Planck description of particle charging in ionized gases,” Phys. Rev. E, vol. 55, no. 1, pp. 991–994, Jan. 1997

    1997

  28. [40]

    Ion-wake Field inside a Glass Box,

    M. Chen, M. Dropmann, B. Zhang, L. S. Matthews, and T. W. Hyde, “Ion-wake Field inside a Glass Box,” Phys. Rev. E, vol. 94, no. 3, Sep. 2016

    2016

  29. [41]

    Alignment and instability of dust crystals in plasmas,

    V. Schweigert, I. Schweigert, A. Melzer, A. Homann, and A. Piel, “Alignment and instability of dust crystals in plasmas,” Phys. Rev. E, vol. 54, no. 4, pp. 4155–4166, Oct. 1996

    1996

  30. [42]

    Anisotropic dust lattice modes,

    A. V. Ivlev and G. Morfill, “Anisotropic dust lattice modes,” Phys. Rev. E, vol. 63, no. 1, p. 016409, Dec. 2000

    2000

  31. [43]

    Mode couplings and resonance instabilities in dust clusters,

    K. Qiao, J. Kong, E. V. Oeveren, L. S. Matthews, and T. W. Hyde, “Mode couplings and resonance instabilities in dust clusters,” Phys. Rev. E, vol. 88, no. 4, p. 043103, Oct. 2013

    2013

  32. [44]

    Mode coupling and resonance instabilities in quasi-two-dimensional dust clusters in complex plasmas,

    K. Qiao, J. Kong, J. Carmona-Reyes, L. S. Matthews, and T. W. Hyde, “Mode coupling and resonance instabilities in quasi-two-dimensional dust clusters in complex plasmas,” Phys. Rev. E, vol. 90, no. 3, p. 033109, Sep. 2014

    2014

  33. [45]

    Potential Field of a Uniformly Charged Ellipsoid,

    W. Cai, “Potential Field of a Uniformly Charged Ellipsoid,” p. 18

  34. [46]

    Measurement of attractive interactions produced by the ion wakefield in dusty plasmas using a constrained collision geometry,

    G. A. Hebner and M. E. Riley, “Measurement of attractive interactions produced by the ion wakefield in dusty plasmas using a constrained collision geometry,” Phys. Rev. E, vol. 68, no. 4, p. 046401, Oct. 2003

    2003

  35. [47]

    Vertical Pairing of Identical Particles Suspended in the Plasma Sheath,

    V. Steinberg, R. Sütterlin, A. V. Ivlev, and G. Morfill, “Vertical Pairing of Identical Particles Suspended in the Plasma Sheath,” Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 86, no. 20, pp. 4540– 4543, May 2001

    2001

  36. [48]

    Mode Couplings and Conversions for Horizontal Dust Particle Pairs in Complex Plasmas,

    K. Qiao, J. Kong, Z. Zhang, L. S. Matthews, and T. W. Hyde, “Mode Couplings and Conversions for Horizontal Dust Particle Pairs in Complex Plasmas,” IEEE Trans. Plasma Sci., vol. 41, no. 4, pp. 745–753, 2013

    2013

  37. [49]

    Mode couplings and resonance instabilities in finite dust chains,

    K. Qiao, J. Kong, L. S. Matthews, and T. W. Hyde, “Mode couplings and resonance instabilities in finite dust chains,” Phys. Rev. E, vol. 91, no. 5, p. 053101, May 2015

    2015

  38. [50]

    Plasmakristall-4: New complex (dusty) plasma laboratory on board the International Space Station,

    M. Y. Pustylnik et al., “Plasmakristall-4: New complex (dusty) plasma laboratory on board the International Space Station,” Rev. Sci. Instrum., vol. 87, no. 9, p. 093505, Sep. 2016

    2016

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.